Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ku Klux Klan


Recommended Posts

No, we don't. What do you have to show that Hoover spent any time chasing down Nazis?

That's a fair question, John. I will look into that, certainly.

Yet the same question applies to you -- what evidence do you have that Hoover actively supported the Nazi Party?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Does the same question apply to me? How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the same question apply to me? How so?

Well, John, you claim that Hoover tried to kill MLK, and proof of that would be nice to see.

Also, you seem to claim that Hoover was somehow a supporter of the Nazi Party, and proof of that would be nice to see.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if I could find proof that satisfies you, Paul. Have a look at what a certain newsweek writer/editor had to say about that. DSome time before MLK's Nobel Price award ceremony.

I seem to claim? Do I or don't I? Proof of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if I could find proof that satisfies you, Paul. Have a look at what a certain newsweek writer/editor had to say about that. DSome time before MLK's Nobel Price award ceremony.

I seem to claim? Do I or don't I? Proof of that?

So, what I'm hearing John, is that you don't really have anything but rumor to the effect that J. Edgar Hoover tried "at least once" to murder MLK. Is that right?

I certainly don't want to nitpick your work, John, because you've struggled for years in this Forum advocating a minority opinion that I believe is totally correct -- i.e. that the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission and related racist organizations in the South bear the greatest weight in the assassination of JFK.

I want to recognize you for that important research. Yet if you claim that J. Edgar Hoover tried to kill MLK, I think that may be overstating your case -- especially if you have no material evidence for the claim.

It is perfectly possible to separate the JFK killers from the JFK cover-up team. It is also possible to separate the KKK from the FBI. If you have further evidence to share that implicates Hoover, I'm all ears.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

re Hoover there are statements by various persons like a Newsweek emplyee that lends support that Hoover did try to kill MLK at least once.

My hypothesis that I'm working under is that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK and there is a conspiracy to cover that up.

I have stated previously a broader aspect of the assassination where the 'Bankers' had their reason, there was a middle man, there was a ground crew and that each of these (hourglass shaped command structure) had their own notions of why and that the top level were not known to the bottom while the top knew everything. The on the ground crew came from elements that one might equate with the idea of the 'Lumpen' thereingroupings like the Minutemen, the KKK, various Law elements and low grade FBI, CIA operatives like Informers. (HDH (FBI, CIA, DPD, USPO PI) for example, Birdsong (MSC, KKK), Zack Van Landringham(MSC(KKK), ex Hoover assistant), Curry, Fritz, and others and others under their command. Walker strikes me as a viable middle man and I also think now that, like Joesten wrote, that there were other Military (MIC) persons involved. The top layer candidates are outlined generally where people like Helms, Dulles, Rockefeller, Hunt, the employers of the above and so on are mentioned.

Using the NIxon principle ''there is an opportunity in everything'' the whole show had its groupies and tacit supporters and others who have an interest in there being a coverup.

Where by law Guilty of Assassinating, Guilt of Conspiracy, Guilt by association, et.c. one can point at a set of persons as the Assassins in the US relevant court/law goes I don't know.

so ''I certainly don't want to nitpick your work, John, because you've struggled for years in this Forum advocating a minority opinion that I believe is totally correct -- i.e. that the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission and related racist organizations in the South bear the greatest weight in the assassination of JFK.'' is 'nitpicking'.

All I've really done is hack away at aspects that others have explored and tried to come to some reconciled perspective.

A work in progress...

Edit add forgot about the political components. Reagan(FBI informer), Bush's, Thurman and other flora.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

re Hoover there are statements by various persons like a Newsweek emplyee that lends support that Hoover did try to kill MLK at least once.

My hypothesis that I'm working under is that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK and there is a conspiracy to cover that up.

I have stated previously a broader aspect of the assassination where...there was a middle man, there was a ground crew and that each of these (hourglass shaped command structure) had their own notions of why; and that the top level were not known to the bottom, while the top knew everything.

The on-the-ground crew came from elements that one might equate with the idea of the 'Lumpen' there in groupings like the Minutemen, the KKK, various Law elements and low grade FBI, CIA operatives like Informers (HDH, FBI, CIA, DPD, USPO PI) for example, Birdsong (MSC, KKK), Zack Van Landringham( MSC (KKK), ex Hoover assistant), Curry, Fritz, and others and others under their command.

Walker strikes me as a viable middle man and I also think now that...there were other Military (MIC) persons involved. The top layer candidates are outlined generally where people like Helms, Dulles, Rockefeller, Hunt, the employers of the above and so on are mentioned...

John, I can appreciate your hypothesis today. I also appreciate that you refer to it as a "hypothesis." I also refer to my theory as a "theory."

I think we agree on several aspects -- the hourglass structure of organization, for example, where the true leadership was invisible to the foot-soldiers.

To reconsider your theory, however, that Hoover belonged in the upper-level of the JFK assassination conspiracy (because of his alleged attempt to kill MLK), I must see the article by the Newsweek writer that you've mentioned for several posts. I've Googled the topic, and can find nothing anywhere to point me to this author.

Do you remember the author's name?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hypothesis that gains credence from a functioning predictivity or from secondary confirmation stands a chance of becoming a theory. Similarly a theory goes through ongoing testing. A theory that depends on hypothesii (SIC) is hypothetical ie a hypothesis.

No matter, just like calling the WCR the first volume (report) of the Presidential Commission... Tomatoes to some. Don't turn my 'hypothesis' into 'theory' (please*) unless you can convince me that that is appropriate nomenculature.

Yes, well. the MLK thing. There's a topic that covered that. Forget google. Try the Forum.

Yes, that shape is defensive with a self sustaining deniability.

ediot typos, add*

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

A hypothesis that gains credence from a functioning predictivity or from secondary confirmation stands a chance of becoming a theory. Similarly a theory goes through ongoing testing. A theory that depends on hypothesii (SIC) is hypothetical ie a hypothesis.

No matter, just like calling the WCR the first volume (report) of the Presidential Commission... Tomatoes to some. Don't turn my 'hypothesis' into 'theory' (please*) unless you can convince me that that is appropriate nomenculature.

Yes, well. the MLK thing. There's a topic that covered that. Forget google. Try the Forum.

Yes, that shape is defensive with a self sustaining deniability.

ediot typos, add*

John, you can be fairly abstract when you want to be. However, your reference to MLK in the context of the JFK assassination is concrete and therefore useful.

The solution to the JFK assassination will surely revolve around the Civil Rights struggles. JFK was not the only Civil Rights hero to be killed in the second half of 1963.

The White Citizens' Councils had failed to Impeach Earl Warren; it had failed to roll back the Brown decision that mandated the racial integration of US public schools. Thus, as it appears to me, the KKK felt some pressure to become more directly involved.

It is with the massive resistance to US Civil Rights, through the Louisiana States Rights Commission in particular, that we encounter an unholy alliance between ex-General Edwin Walker and former FBI agent, Guy Banister.

There is one member of the Louisiana White racist movement that links them both, namely, Medford Evans, the university professor and valued editor of American Opinion, the journal of the John Birch Society, whose two principle slogan were, Impeach Earl Warren! as well as, US out of the UN!

Medford Evans accompanied Edwin Walker before the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness in 1962. Medford Evers later said about Guy Banister, that he is, "a friend of mine, as it happens."

We have a match -- and we have a plausible JFK conspiracy.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about Hoover?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about Hoover?

Actually, John, I'm still on the fence when it comes to J. Edgar Hoover. My current strategy is to give Hoover the benefit of the doubt. But the evidence remains suspicious.

On the positive side, I still believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved with the FBI at only the lowest levels of a stool pigeon. I strongly suspect that Oswald received $10 and $20 checks from the FBI on a semi-regular basis, for private detective work involving a Minolta mini-camera.

This does not in any way make Lee Oswald into an "employee" of the FBI. He was a low-level asset, much like any stool pigeon for the FBI -- and that is my best opinion of Oswald's involvement with the FBI. Hoover denied any involvement at all, and I suspect that this was merely an expedient political position.

On the negative side, Hoover knew far too much about Lee Harvey Oswald far too quickly for my comfort. He was very quick to name Oswald as the lone killer, and he convinced the FBI and LBJ to follow his lead in this approach to the JFK assassination. They marched with Hoover, and so did the Warren Commission. Hoover was the leader of making Lee Harvey Oswald the patsy in the eyes of the world. (We must inquire whether this reaches deeper into actual history.)

On the positive side -- the best I can say for Hoover is that he meant well by this, insofar as he wanted to prevent Civil War from breaking out in the USA, which would certainly have occurred, IMHO. Hoover wasn't trying to protect the militant right -- he had no sympathy for the KKK, the Minutemen or the John Birch Society -- as we know from his personal writings. Instead, he was trying to protect National Security.

On the negative side -- the suspicions run so high about Hoover in the JFK research literature that I don't need to repeat that here. However, Sylvia Meagher's judgment -- that Hoover was an "accomplice after the fact," loses its bite if we regard Hoover's "lone-nut killer" gambit as a sincere strategy to avoid Civil War.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the various Counter Intelligence Programs (COINTELPRO) 1956 onwards? Till '64.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the various Counter Intelligence Programs (COINTELPRO) 1956 onwards? Till '64.

John, it is well-documented that the FBI conducted COINTELPRO to suppress domestic political organizations that it perceived as disruptive of 'law and order.'

It is also documented that certain members of the Black Panther Party were killed as a result of clashes resulting from COINTELPRO.

It is also documented that J. Edgar Hoover had a particular grudge against Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., and that he battled the Civil Rights leaders of the NAACP and CORE, accusing them of collaboration with the Communist Party.

Yet it would be a mistake, IMHO, to simply accuse J. Edgar Hoover of White racism. That is not the case, in my view, because the COINTELPRO also targeted White people, too, i.e. in the KKK, in Cuban Exile movements, in the National States Rights Party, in the Minutemen, as well as in the Communist Party and "New Left" and so on.

J. Edgar Hoover primarily acted to prevent violence - as he saw it. When the FBI stooped to individual violence, it was in order to prevent massive violence, in his own opinion. (That he himself required oversight is today obvious in hindsight.)

It is also true that J. Edgar Hoover was getting old -- had passed the age of retirement -- and he also believed that the Black role in the Civil Rights movement was potentially dangerous on a mass scale. He was old-fashioned enough to fall for the Southern propaganda that the Civil Rights movement was Communist.

This strategy, invented by Southern Senators, brilliantly drafted Anticommunists in this completely separate battle against Black Civil Rights. Sadly, J. Edgar Hoover fell for it. Yet Hoover did not fall for the entire Southern program. He would label the John Birch Society as "unpatriotic," for example, and would infiltrate the Minutemen seeking informers.

Sadly, most of COINTELPRO was used to suppress Civil Rights groups, and only about 15% was used to marginalize and subvert White hate groups.

Nevertheless, Hoover meant well, IMHO. His stated objectives for COINTELPRO were to "expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" the activities of radical movements and their leaders..

It is a paradox of US history that although RFK himself was once a target of COINTELPRO, yet RFK himself personally authorized some of these programs.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did they target the Panthers and the KKK? Who got most attention pre '64 and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did they target the Panthers and the KKK? Who got most attention pre '64 and why?

John, the FBI activities against the KKK go back to 1918. In 1922 the Louisiana governor John Parker asked for FBI help in controlling Louisiana's escalating Klan activity.

Evidently local authorities in Louisiana had become thoroughly intimidated by the Klan, which was even interfering with the governor's mail, telephone and telegraph. Murder was a part of the KKK activities, and the FBI brought the culprits to justice, though the KKK interfered with the trial, with the witnesses and so on.

Although such FBI activity did not stop KKK activity, the rapid rise of KKK membership did wane due to the publicity of FBI reports about atrocities.

During the 1950's the FBI responded to a fresh escalation of KKK activity by using female informers and increasing their pool of police informers. The FBI obtained convictions of KKK criminals in Selma AL, Jackson MS and Atlanta GA -- which was impossible without the FBI because of the KKK's tight control of local police and politicians.

In 1963 the FBI led the investigation into the bombing at the 16th Street Baptist Church in which four Black children were murdered.

In retrospect, one wishes that the FBI had done more against the KKK and less against the NAACP and CORE. It was probably this imbalance that led to the rise of the Black Panthers as a reaction to KKK violence. Yet like the KKK, the Black Panthers were openly violent and confrontational, and the FBI intended to suppress all domestic violence.

It was a most progressive act, therefore, when JFK came out in his June 1963 speech advocating the Black Civil Rights movement. One might argue that even J. Edgar Hoover was caught off guard by this official advocacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., whom Hoover had targeted for special persecution.

Yet I find no convincing evidence to the charge that J. Edgar Hoover sought to kill MLK. MLK was outspokenly nonviolent, while the Black Panthers were outspokenly violent. The FBI violently clashed with the Black Panthers, but they did not (until proven otherwise) violently clash with the NAACP or MLK.

The main reason that the KKK continued so strongly, despite FBI suppression, is that at their peak the KKK had hundreds of thousands of members nationwide (vastly outnumberng the FBI) while the Black Panther Party, for example, had a few thousand members scattered in inner cities.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...